Drought Characterization and Potential of Nature-Based Solutions for Drought Risk Mitigation in Eastern Ethiopia

Dejene W. Sintayehu (), Asfaw Kebede Kassa, Negash Tessema, Bekele Girma, Sintayehu Alemayehu and Jemal Yousuf Hassen
Additional contact information
Dejene W. Sintayehu: The International Center for Tropical Agriculture, Addis Ababa P.O. Box 5689, Ethiopia
Asfaw Kebede Kassa: Haramaya Institute of Technology, Haramaya University, Dire Dawa P.O. Box 138, Ethiopia
Negash Tessema: Haramaya Institute of Technology, Haramaya University, Dire Dawa P.O. Box 138, Ethiopia
Bekele Girma: Haramaya Institute of Technology, Haramaya University, Dire Dawa P.O. Box 138, Ethiopia
Sintayehu Alemayehu: International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT), Nairobi P.O. Box 823-00621, Kenya
Jemal Yousuf Hassen: College of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences, Haramaya University, Dire Dawa P.O. Box 138, Ethiopia

Sustainability, 2023, vol. 15, issue 15, 1-22

Abstract: Drought is one of the challenges in Ethiopia that affects the agricultural production. Ecosystems can mitigate the effects of climate-related hazards including drought. For this reason, nature-based solutions (NbS) are becoming more prominent to manage climate-related impacts in developing countries; however, there is still limited empirical evidence, which would inform NbS policy and practices. Thus, the aim of this study was to characterize droughts in Eastern Ethiopia (the case of Erer Sub-basin) and assess the effectiveness of various NbS for drought. The temporal changes in soil moisture deficit index (SMDI) (agricultural drought) and standard precipitation evapotranspiration index (SPEI) (meteorological drought) at various timescales (1, 3, and 6 months) between 1981 and 2020 were analyzed. Qualitative analysis was used to categorize and evaluate the effectiveness of NbS to mitigate drought risk by adopting a Living Labs approach. Overall, the study revealed that droughts showed an increasing trend with more frequency, longevity, and severity. The drought analysis results showed that SPEI’s variants were less reliable than SMDI 0–5 and SMDI 5–100 . With an increase in rainfall, SPEI showed stronger relationships with SMDI 0–5 at one and two-month delays between May and July. SPEI and SMDI 5–100 performed better in terms of capturing actual drought occurrences than SMDI 0–5 . The results of focus group discussions (FGD) suggested NbS such as habitat restoration, structural restoration, reforestation, rehabilitation, revegetation, land enclosures, conservancies, and locally managed areas have been practiced as a strategy to manage drought risks. Overall, the study indicated that a new, comprehensive approach through nature-based solutions to reduce the risk of drought is urgently needed.

Keywords: agricultural drought; meteorological drought; land enclosures; reforestation; rehabilitation; restoration (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2023
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/15/11613/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/15/11613/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:15:p:11613-:d:1204027

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().